It seems to be well established, that an asymmetric capacitor has a force towards the smaller plate of the cap. I will include the paper on the subject.

We then have a shaft, that has a pancake coil in one end and wires going to a propeller in the middle of the shaft (water wheel might be a better analogy. blades 90 degrees from shaft). This propeller is plastic and has the blades as asymmetric caps. We feed this pancake coil with another coil. The pancake coil on the shaft has wires going to the caps through avramenko plugs.

You can pump more voltage to the caps through the diode by pulsing the input coil. Now we have HV DC asymmetric caps loaded and there will be a force towards to smaller cap plate. Caps face 180 degrees to each other so they make the shaft turn in one direction only.

After the caps are full, you only need to supply the amount the caps leak. This you can get pretty small with insulated caps.

Great confusion. The "lifter" is a device that works with the ionic wind. If you use an insulated wire, the effect disappears completely (I have experimented it). This is proof that it is not a capacitor effect and that electrical contact must exist for air molecules to ionize. The Biefeld-Brown effect is not at work here.

Secondly, the Biefeld-Brown effect has never really been demonstrated, even in a vacuum. Some experiments have seen effects, but extremely weak. For me they are explicable by the "hidden" capacities between each plate and the environment, which allows Coulomb's forces to act quite conventionally.

Great confusion. The "lifter" is a device that works with the ionic wind. If you use an insulated wire, the effect disappears completely (I have experimented it). This is proof that it is not a capacitor effect and that electrical contact must exist for air molecules to ionize. The Biefeld-Brown effect is not at work here.

Secondly, the Biefeld-Brown effect has never really been demonstrated, even in a vacuum. Some experiments have seen effects, but extremely weak. For me they are explicable by the "hidden" capacities between each plate and the environment, which allows Coulomb's forces to act quite conventionally.

Well lets not use an insulated wire then!

I have no clue where you get your information. Has never been demonstrated? So I guess they just give out patents for random shit...

There are pretty extensive studies done and I posted a document of just one. Rand corp and Navy took Brown's research and he never had another public patent after that. Yeah. Pretty sure nothing came out of that research...

Yeah i would not reject the evidence, i don't think it's smart. Yet an immense arrogance makes to do that. It is not unusual, a very long time ago when i learned in a special school of physics and mathematics, there were many such there. Ignoring some evidence is a way to make quick easy decisions, which also makes one look smart, it looks that one knows when many are not able to understand.

I hate it when there are lots of experiments done with these devices in vacuum and the opposition can just say "ionic wind" that not enough to account for the force or can't pass trough insulators. I think the agenda is to move the debate into ionic wind and then disprove ionic wind. The actual point is that we do not care. If the motor turns with practically no input inside atmosphere, then maybe we need to build the motors inside our atmosphere?

Very little input required to keep the caps full and a net force appears. That is the meat here.

The first lifters were built at the beginning of the 20th century. JL Naudin popularized the subject in the early 2000s, with many fantasies about anti-gravity that were of course never confirmed.

I made my own lifter. I powered it with the HV of a CRT, and really, it works. But by isolating the upper wire, the effect disappears, proof that the principle is not a capacitive effect of an asymmetric capacitor. This is confirmed by the fact that DC current flows from one electrode to the other one. Even a beginner in electricity understand that.

The thin upper wire causes a large electric field gradient that attracts polar molecules from air. These in contact with the wire give or take an electron. Once charged, they are accelerated to the large electrode. The reaction causes the lifter to be propelled in the opposite direction.

The explanation has been known for a long time and is perfectly conventional. It seems that newbies are rediscovering the lifter and are surprised by ordinary things, referring to dubious sites and mixing lifters and asymmetric capacitors with solid dielectric, which are another technology.

Thanks for the link. A plane is much more efficient than a helicopter, just as the prototype described in the article is certainly much more efficient than the Naudin's lifter. Nevertheless, it remains very inefficient: "Von dieser elektrischen Energie werden aber bisher nur rund 2,5 Prozent in Schub umgesetzt."A high current flows from one electrode to the other, and most of it is lost in the resistance of the ion path. Considerable improvements are needed for ion propulsion in the air to be of operational interest, as the force/energy ratio is currently far too low.In water I think MHD is much more effective.

if there is a net force towards to smaller plate of an asymmetrical cap, where is the force pointing if you encapsulate one plate inside another? Just one wire coming out of a 'flying saucer' that covers the other plate? So now there is a net force towards the smaller terminal's center, that inside the other plate. I mean that is so beautiful it must be anti-gravity